Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg admitted in an interview Thursday that the nation's largest wireless network was "never in the running" for the first-generation iPhone because Apple was focused on the GSM technology.

Seidenberg filled in details of the lengthy negotiation process between Apple and Verizon in an interview with journalist Charlie Rose of BusinessWeek.

Rose's first question focused on the ongoing debate over the relative merits of the AT&T and Verizon networks. "Do you expect to have the problems AT&T had with the iPhone?" Rose asked.

As expected, Seidenberg remained confident in Verizon's ability to withstand a glut of new iPhone users, citing "a little-known fact" that the network carries "almost as much data as [AT&T]." "We think we're ready, and we're not going to talk much about it. We're just going to let the performance speak for itself," said Seidenberg.

According to Seidenberg, when Apple approached carriers about the first-generation iPhone, "it wanted one carrier in every major market." Since Apple was focused on just one technology, GSM, they chose AT&T. Verizon had "good discussions" with them, but Apple wasn't interested in building devices for GSM and CDMA.

As such, Verizon never ended up participating in "the sort of mating dance" that AT&T and Apple went through, because it was "never in the running." Over the last three years, however, Apple has been expanding to multiple carriers in other markets, so Verizon "did have a lot of discussion with them over the last couple years," Seidenberg noted.

When asked by Rose who initiated the talks, Seidenberg admitted that he had called up Apple CEO Steve Jobs and gone out to visit him. Verizon President and COO Lowell McAdam called up Apple COO Tim Cook and went to visit him, as well.

"We consciously reached out to them more than once. This was the view that we had that...eventually their interests would align with ours."

Seidenberg praised Jobs, calling the Verizon iPhone "just another arrow in his quiver," while also calling the partnership between Apple and his company strategic because Verizon is "further along in 4G" than the other carriers. "If you do your job well," he continued, "then in an industry like this, eventually the right partners are going to end up on the dance floor."

During the interview, Seidenberg cited an "hilarious" statistic: "90 percent of the traffic on the Internet in five years will be video." According to the executive, Verizon is "sitting in a position to say that between our global Internet backbone, our FiOS [residential fiber-optic network], and now our nationwide wireless network, we're in a position to put all the video that anybody wants to put on any tablet, on any device, any television set...anything they want.

"So we can have a lot of fun in the short term banging heads with AT&T, but in the long term it's going to open up a new market and allow us to work with a great company like Apple to help us develop products."

Seidenberg said he was fine with not having the Verizon logo on the iPhone because the network "has already proven that we're more than a one-device company."

"We're going to continue to do a great job on the BlackBerry and a great job on the Droid," he added.

After 45 years of working at Verizon, Seidenberg will retire later this year. McAdam is set to take over as CEO.

Seidenberg's comments Thursday were in line with those made by McAdam on Wednesday. McAdam told Bloomberg in an interview that the technical planning for the Verizon iPhone took 6-9 months.

Verizon announced the long-expected CDMA iPhone Tuesday at a media event in New York City Tuesday. The carrier will begin selling Apple's popular smartphone on Feb. 10 for a starting price of $199.

See the Non Technical discussions took way longer then the technical, and at least VZ admitted they were the ones stroking Apple for years not the other way around. As I said before this is way more important to VZ than Apple, then again this could give apple a proving ground for LTE, but as we know VZ LTE is data only till then end of 2012... so will will have to see, Maybe the ipad 2 will be LTE on VZ.

During the interview, Seidenberg cited an "hilarious" statistic: "90 percent of the traffic on the Internet in five years will be video." According to the executive, Verizon is "sitting in a position to say that between our global Internet backbone, our FiOS [residential fiber-optic network], and now our nationwide wireless network, we're in a position to put all the video that anybody wants to put on any tablet, on any device, any television set...anything they want.[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ][/c]

Their existing customers certainly appreciate how they are changing their upgrade policies so that unless your existing contract has been pretty much completed, no discounted iPhone for you!

And of course, Verizon will actively degrade video from sources that don't originate from Verizon or one of their partners.

Once the iPhone get's going on their network, I also expect Verizon to also flip from having more generous data plans than AT&T to ones with lower limits than AT&T, in order to 'differentiate' their plans...

Sure did seem to be a lot of people over the years, authoritatively declaring on these boards that Apple went to Verizon first and got told to go take a hike. Crazy old control freak Jobs overstepped his bounds and had to go plead his case to AT&T after Verizon showed him the door, or so the story went.

No worries, though-- this bit of urban legend will still be dredged up whenever and wherever Apple haters have an axe to grind, till the end of time.

They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.

According to Seidenberg, when Apple approached carriers about the first-generation iPhone, "it wanted one carrier in every major market." Since Apple was focused on just one technology, GSM, they chose AT&T. Verizon had "good discussions" with them, but Apple wasn't interested in building devices for GSM and CDMA.

Yeah, they went to AT&T, right after Verizon rejected Apple from the start.

as we know VZ LTE is data only till then end of 2012... so will will have to see, Maybe the ipad 2 will be LTE on VZ.

If one is to take the above Timeline "as Gospel", totally accurate, indisputable truth, (please provide the links in support of that statement), then does one have to assume that Simultaneous Voice & Data on Verizon's CDMA won't be available "till then end of 2012", 2 years from now...????!!!!

In that case, I guess I should buy my first iPhone ASAP, and have it on Verizon, so that my Contract Meter starts running ASAP, and have it expire as close to "the end of 2012" as possible? An additional reason for that would be that it's unlikely that Verizon will offer early Upgrades on iPhones, as ATT did, cause ATT wanted to lock in customers, fearing that those customer would run away to Verizon or elsewhere...

Please don't think I am trying to give you a dig, it's just pretty agonizing at this point for me trying to decide on the Timing of my 1st iPhone purchase, and picking between these 2 carriers!

I want to have Simultaneous Voice & Data, and Rollover Minutes, but I also want to be able to use the phone! As is the case now, it seems impossible to do both, unless one is in a good ATT area, and their Network is not too busy!

Also, all this Opinion Wars as far as ATT vs. Verizon are frustrating too, and it's going to get a lot worse when the Ads Wars are about to get more edge (pun intended) !

Yeah - no brainier really - GSM is a much better technology and it's global. CDMA would have been a stupid choice. Its only happening now because at&t have shown they can't build a GSM network and so provide a rubbish service

If one is to take the above Timeline "as Gospel", totally accurate, indisputable truth, (please provide the links in support of that statement), then does one have to assume that Simultaneous Voice & Data on Verizon's CDMA won't be available "till then end of 2012", 2 years from now...????!!!!

Verizon's CDMA network may never have simultaneous voice and data. The original poster's statement that LTE will be data only until the end of 2012 means that at that point the LTE network will handle voice and data simultaneously. The real question is whether Apple would ever make an iPhone that has both CDMA and LTE. That would then get you your simultaneous voice (via CDMA) and data (via LTE).

I think it's a toss-up if that will happen. It might be too early (technologically speaking) to expect at CDMA/LTE iPhone in 2011. They could do it in 2012, but would they do it for only one year if the expectation is that in 2013 Verizon's network will be ready for an LTE-only phone?

Wow, that didn't take long. Any thoughts on why the CEO of Verizon would lie about this?

So he wouldn't look S.T.U.P.I.D.?

Dear shareholders and Board of Directors... The iPhone could have been manufactured with our technology for the past five years and our subscriber base and profits would have been more then they were, but I said "Pass"... Can I have another raise?!

iPhone was a radical departure from things at the time... Not everything that comes out of Cupertino is hit. Apples terms may have been unacceptable, coming from a "Phone Startup"! It's possible. Didn't Xerox execs pass on PARCs GUI for computers? Didn't Bill Clinton not have sex with that woman? Could not Verizon's CEO fall into both categories? Stupid and a liar trying to cover his mistakes? It wouldn't be the first time. \

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash. Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

I want to have Simultaneous Voice & Data, and Rollover Minutes, but I also want to be able to use the phone!

Eventually, it is likely that ATT will start carrying some good Android phones. My guess is sooner rather than later. None of them are famous for signal attenuation, detuning or dropped calls. It is also likely that Apple will fix the antenna problems on the ATT iPhone eventually.

...During the interview, Seidenberg cited an "hilarious" statistic: "90 percent of the traffic on the Internet in five years will be video."

I anticipate readership confusion on the above statement: it isn't that 90% of the things a user will do will become video ... it is saying that 90% of a user's bandwidth consumption will be consumed by video.

Comparing the filesize of a 1 minute video clip to a 1 minute music file (or a phone call), this claim isn't particularly ... surprising ... at all.

However, the bigger question is why whould it be described as being ... "hilarious" ... ?

I think the answer comes from Seidenberg himself, as the Fox in the Henhouse: it comes down to the data caps and $$/GB rate structure being worked up by the service providers for consumers to pay ... thus, the reason for the "hilarious" tag is because they'll be laughing all their way to the bank.

Eventually, it is likely that ATT will start carrying some good Android phones. My guess is sooner rather than later. None of them are famous for signal attenuation, detuning or dropped calls. It is also likely that Apple will fix the antenna problems on the ATT iPhone eventually.

Hang in there.

Apparently, they will start carrying them late this quarter or early next. They announced the Motorola Atrix, HTC Inspire, and some top-end Samsung phone (can't remember the name) at CES, and said they will all be coming soon. All of them are really high-end devices too, especially the Atrix. Look them up, though, at the very least the spec sheets are incredible.

Their existing customers certainly appreciate how they are changing their upgrade policies so that unless your existing contract has been pretty much completed, no discounted iPhone for you!

And of course, Verizon will actively degrade video from sources that don't originate from Verizon or one of their partners.

Once the iPhone get's going on their network, I also expect Verizon to also flip from having more generous data plans than AT&T to ones with lower limits than AT&T, in order to 'differentiate' their plans...

The "New Every Two" discount gave you an additional $100 off for waiting the entire 2 years of your contract instead of upgrading sooner. This is on top of new subscriber pricing, so you'd be able to get a 16gb Verizon iPhone for only $99 instead of $199. It's a nice way to keep a customer at the end of their contract.

Their new phone policy of 13 months was also very generous, but clearly unsustainable if they got the iPhone. The average cost of a smartphone to Verizon is $529, but the iPhone is $599-699. Giving people new phones practically every year would hurt their bottom line.

Sure did seem to be a lot of people over the years, authoritatively declaring on these boards that Apple went to Verizon first and got told to go take a hike. Crazy old control freak Jobs overstepped his bounds and had to go plead his case to AT&T after Verizon showed him the door, or so the story went.

No worries, though-- this bit of urban legend will still be dredged up whenever and wherever Apple haters have an axe to grind, till the end of time.

Straight from the horse's mouth: "We said no." Said Jim Gerace, a VZW VP. "We have nothing bad to say about the Apple iPhone. We just couldn't reach a deal that was mutually beneficial." Talks began as far back as two years ago, but Apple's demands were steep. They also give us an idea of what exactly is behind the Apple / Cingular agreement: Apple wanted a percentage of monthly service fees, control over distribution that would limit iPhone sales to Apple and Verizon stores, and even some control over service and support for iPhone customers. "They would have been stepping in between us and our customers to the point where we would have almost had to take a back seat ... on hardware and service support," say Gerace. (these comments were from 2007)

I want to have Simultaneous Voice & Data, and Rollover Minutes, but I also want to be able to use the phone! As is the case now, it seems impossible to do both, unless one is in a good ATT area, and their Network is not too busy!

You don't reveal where you're located, but I've never had any problem worth worrying about with AT&T coverage, either where I live or in the various places to which I've traveled, since switching to them from VZ over 2 years ago. And VZ is clearly the dominant carrier in my area.

This isn't to say that other people's coverage issues aren't real, only to point out that they aren't universal. Dare I add that people in NYC may be more vocal than average when they're not happy?

All that said, US cellular coverage overall is pathetic compared to that in western Europe.

Yeah, they went to AT&T, right after Verizon rejected Apple from the start.

That's what I think happened... Here is my conspiracy theory....

Let's take a look back to 2005 Apple Music Event with the release of iTunes 5, iPod Nano and of course ROKR...

You know the ROKR, the phone that had iTunes "installed" on a Motorola Phone to be used on Cingular's network. Didn't Cingular purchase ATT and kept the name in 2004? About the time Apple, Jobs and company would be doing the wheeling and dealing and workup of the product at that time for the June 2005 release at the Apple music event?

I remember watching that event and was amazed at the barely lip service Jobs gave to the ROKR. It wasn't a "and one more thing" as in SURPRISE!. It was more like an afterthought, "Oh, by the way..." and took all of 5 minutes to introduce product, introduce Cingular's CEO to talk about it, brief description and very brief demo.

What does that tell me?

Jobs first foray into dealing with outside phone manufacturers "Motorola" and "ATT er Cingular" phone carrier. The product was not really worthy to have Apple associated with it... really. I'm sure it was not what Jobs had in mind but was what he could get at the time based on numerous factors, such as clout, Apple's market share, did they finish paying off Microsoft's loan that propped Apple up in the lean times, the limits of the technology itself... very important, dealing with "Phone Guys" (as Palm ex-CEO Ed Colligan likes to refer to PC guys), Motorola and Cingular, etc. So maybe Apple, as part of it's plan but not solely the plan, it just worked out that way, that Apple working on iOS and iPad, moved to iPhone with the iOS technology, and then went shopping for a carrier in order to know what to build. Having dealt with Cingular, er ATT, maybe decided to give Verizon the opportunity, to which they were shot down. We know it's a big mistake now but at the time, Apple's iPhone success could of "remained to be seen". After all, Apple gave us the hockey puck mouse, MobileMe release debacle and The Mac Cube. So we know Cupertino doesn't always bat 1000. Apple had the basis for what an Apple brand phone technology could do, they just needed to know what carrier of the two biggest, would give them a shot and knowing Steve's ego, on Apple's terms, Verizon didn't need the hassle of dealing with Steve, but ATT needed a niche that differentiated it against Verizon because it had nothing going for them. Other words, Verizon said "No" (so no CDMA crafted phone), while ATT said yes (Jobs to Apple, order those GSM radio chips!) to a sight unseen product based on Apple terms. Why was it a "unseen" product... Vaporware until Apple could design and build knowing which chips and technology to put into the thing, that would compliment the iOS which was already developed. Why would I say this, because that's what Stan Sigman CEO of Cingular said at Apple's January 2007 iPhone's first introduction prior to FCC approval and June's release.

"10:48am - "When's it going to be available? We're shipping them in June -- we're announcing it today because we have to go get FCC approval... we thought it'd be better to introduce this today rather than let the FCC introduce this.
Europe in the 4th quarter of this year, Asia in 2008. "We've chosen Cingular."

"They're going to be our exclusive partner in the US -- it's a unique partnership though. We're going to be doing innovation together. We worked on visual voicemail, the first fruit of this collaboration. We'll be selling iPhone through our own stores and Cingular stores."

Sure did seem to be a lot of people over the years, authoritatively declaring on these boards that Apple went to Verizon first and got told to go take a hike. Crazy old control freak Jobs overstepped his bounds and had to go plead his case to AT&T after Verizon showed him the door, or so the story went.

No worries, though-- this bit of urban legend will still be dredged up whenever and wherever Apple haters have an axe to grind, till the end of time.

Don't forget that they're were a lot of Apple zealots on here , some on my ignore list, that bashed Verizon left and right for this over the years and blamed Verizon not Jobs and praised AT&T regardless of the bad signal and service.
It is the deranged Apple lover who will always bash everybody and anybody when it comes to blame- never Apple.

The gist of that article is pretty informative if you read it carefully enough. Seems that Verizon feels that although they are behind AT&T today, they're in a position to blow past them in terms of value and quality of service in the next few years. They seem pretty confident that they're at a point now where they can not only tackle Apple, but be the best provider within 5 years.

According to the carriers, 2-5 gb a month is all you should need. Isn't that nice?

I for one will keep my unlimited data plan, forever.

That may not be possible. Remember, the contracts are to lock you in, not the carrier. They can cancel these contracts at any time they wish, but if they do you can then leave the carrier without paying the ETF fee. If you are not in a contract they can adjust the amount of data and prices just as they did with the contract-free iPad WiFi+3G. Either way, there is no guaranteed lock in for your unlimited data plan. Personally, I hope the Verizon iPhone will affect AT&T enough to keep that they continue to allow those with unlimited plans to maintain them.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

After all, Apple gave us the hockey puck mouse, MobileMe release debacle and The Mac Cube. So we know Cupertino doesn't always bat 1000... did they finish paying off Microsoft's loan that propped Apple up in the lean times ...

We get it. Apple is not perfect! My world just came crashing down on me. Damn you! Rot'nApple.

But you forgot, the Apple III, OpenDoc and Copland! Also the Pippin' and eWorld!

You seem to mention this in just about every one of your posts. With a user name like "Rot'nApple" I can't imagine why anyone would ever take you seriously - you obvious have a biased opinion and because of that, have somehow let emotion get in the way of logic.

Sorry, but to be anti-something as you are takes as much blind-ignorance and energy as it does to be a zealot or raving fanboy. They are the same, just on opposite sides.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rot'nApple

Didn't Cingular purchase ATT and kept the name in 2004

Cingular purchased AT&T Wireless, not AT&T, and kept the Cingular name. SBC then purchased AT&T and changed their name to AT&T (no more SBC name). Then AT&T purchased Cingular while Apple and Cingular were wheeling and dealing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rot'nApple

I remember watching that event and was amazed at the barely lip service Jobs gave to the ROKR. It wasn't a "and one more thing" as in SURPRISE!. It was more like an afterthought, "Oh, by the way..." and took all of 5 minutes to introduce product, introduce Cingular's CEO to talk about it, brief description and very brief demo.

At the time Motorola was the best selling mobile phone manufacturer in the US with the RAZR. So it was kind of a big deal (in the industry) to partner with them on the ROKR. The device itself wasn't really anything special, but that's not Apple's fault. All Apple supplied was the ability to play FairPlay tracks. That was kind of a big deal, because up until that point only the iPod could play FairPlay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rot'nApple

Why was it a "unseen" product... Vaporware until Apple could design and build knowing which chips and technology to put into the thing, that would compliment the iOS which was already developed

"Vaporware" is a term applied to ANNOUNCED products that NEVER materialize in the time frame given. It does not apply to products that have never been announced or promised to customers. Until that time this is usually referred to as R&D (research and development). Your use of vaporware is just a negative connotation in an attempt to belittle Apple's development efforts.

It was an unseen device at the time because it was still under development. Steve Jobs himself said they started out designing an OS for a tablet and realized they could build a phone around it. I'm guessing they didn't start designing the hardware until after they had a carrier as a partner, which makes absolute sense. Why waste time and money on developing a prototype for product that requires a partnership with an outside company until you know who that partner is going to be and what tech is needed to build it? Simple really.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rot'nApple

AGAIN MY CONSPIRACY THEORY, so take it for what it is worth!

Here's my two cents.

Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.

Gonna be my strategy! We're in a rural area where ATT service is spotty, so we've waited for a VZ iPhone. It'll take two years (at least) before VZ's "convergence" network is reasonably complete. So 2012, or even 2013, will be a good time to finally buy a "universal" phone we can use both at home and overseas.

Straight from the horse's mouth: "We said no." Said Jim Gerace, a VZW VP. "We have nothing bad to say about the Apple iPhone. We just couldn't reach a deal that was mutually beneficial." Talks began as far back as two years ago, but Apple's demands were steep. They also give us an idea of what exactly is behind the Apple / Cingular agreement: Apple wanted a percentage of monthly service fees, control over distribution that would limit iPhone sales to Apple and Verizon stores, and even some control over service and support for iPhone customers. "They would have been stepping in between us and our customers to the point where we would have almost had to take a back seat ... on hardware and service support," say Gerace. (these comments were from 2007)

Hey! This is a fanboy site... keep your facts and your quotes to yourself. We only accept heresay and conjecture here.

Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.

That may not be possible. Remember, the contracts are to lock you in, not the carrier. They can cancel these contracts at any time they wish, but if they do you can then leave the carrier without paying the ETF fee. If you are not in a contract they can adjust the amount of data and prices just as they did with the contract-free iPad WiFi+3G. Either way, there is no guaranteed lock in for your unlimited data plan. Personally, I hope the Verizon iPhone will affect AT&T enough to keep that they continue to allow those with unlimited plans to maintain them.

So let's say that when the iPhone 5 comes out in June, and AT&T decides to nix my unlimited data for a 2GB plan, and I've still got a year left on my contract. Are you saying I could then get out with no ETF and keep my phone?